Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Viewpoint
  • Published:

Are excellent systematic reviews of clinical trials useful for patient care?

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Donahue KE et al. (2008) Systematic review: comparative effectiveness and harms of disease-modifying medications for rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med 148: 124–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Feinstein AR (1983) An additional basic science for clinical medicine: II. The limitations of randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 99: 544–550

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Pincus T and Sokka T (2004) Clinical trials in rheumatic diseases: designs and limitations. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 30: 701–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Felson DT et al. (1990) The comparative efficacy and toxicity of second-line drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Results of two metaanalyses. Arthritis Rheum 33: 1449–1461

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Pincus T et al. (1992) Long-term drug therapy for rheumatoid arthritis in seven rheumatology private practices: II. Second-line drugs and prednisone. J Rheumatol 19: 1885–1894

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yazici Y et al. (2005) Long term safety of methotrexate in routine clinical care: discontinuation is unusual and rarely the result of laboratory abnormalities. Ann Rheum Dis 64: 207–211

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sokka T and Pincus T (2003) Most patients receiving routine care for rheumatoid arthritis in 2001 did not meet inclusion criteria for most recent clinical trials or American College of Rheumatology criteria for remission. J Rheumatol 30: 1138–1146

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pincus T et al. (2005) Patients seen for standard rheumatoid arthritis care have significantly better articular, radiographic, laboratory, and functional status in 2000 than in 1985. Arthritis Rheum 52: 1009–1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Duclos M et al. (2006) Retention rates of tumor necrosis factor blockers in daily practice in 770 rheumatic patients. J Rheumatol 33: 2433–2438

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sokka T et al. (2008) Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. A global perspective of the use of antirheumatic drugs. Mod Rheumatol, in press

    Google Scholar 

  11. Puolakka K et al. (2005) Early suppression of disease activity is essential for maintenance of work capacity in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis: five-year experience from the FIN-RACo trial. Arthritis Rheum 52: 36–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Grigor C et al. (2004) Effect of a treatment strategy of tight control for rheumatoid arthritis (the TICORA study): a single-blind randomised controlled trial. Lancet 364: 263–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Goekoop-Ruiterman YP et al. (2005) Clinical and radiographic outcomes of four different treatment strategies in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (the BeSt study): a randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 52: 3381–3390

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Verstappen SMM et al. (2007) Intensive treatment with methotrexate in early rheumatoid arthritis: aiming for remission. Computer Assisted Management in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (CAMERA, an open-label strategy trial). Ann Rheum Dis 66: 1443–1449

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Wolfe F and Michaud K (2007) Resistance of rheumatoid arthritis patients to changing therapy. Arthritis Rheum 56: 2135–2142

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Smith GC and Pell JP (2003) Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systemic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 327: 1459–1461

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theodore Pincus.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

T Pincus is a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb and Amgen, and has received grants/research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Amgen. The other authors declared no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pincus, T., Yazici, Y. & Sokka, T. Are excellent systematic reviews of clinical trials useful for patient care?. Nat Rev Rheumatol 4, 294–295 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0812

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0812

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing